Welcome to Cancer articles category.

You can find informaion on Cancer articles and news.

By inserting a gene into normal immune cells isolated from melanoma patients, scientists have turned the cells into cancer fighters. This new technique represents the first use of gene therapy to treat cancer, the researchers say.

In the past several years, scientists have been modestly successful in treating a few cancers using a method called adoptive cell transfer. This technique relies on the natural ability of certain immune cells called T cells or lymphocytes to recognize and kill cancer cells in some patients.

In this method, researchers first isolate a patient’s most aggressive tumor-killing T cells and multiply them in the lab. Doctors destroy the patient’s remaining T cells and replace them with the anticancer versions. If all goes well, these cells home in on tumors and kill them.

However, adoptive cell transfer isn’t a viable treatment for the majority of people with cancer, explains Steven A. Rosenberg of the National Cancer Institute in Bethesda, Md. For example, only half of melanoma patients seem to have these specialized tumor-killing T cells, and the cells that target other types of cancers such as breast, lung, and liver cancer are “very difficult to find” in people with those diseases, he says.

Seeking to broaden the technique’s reach to more cancer patients, Rosenberg and his colleagues combined it with a type of gene therapy. The researchers worked with 17 people with advanced melanoma that other treatments had failed to control.

Rosenberg’s team removed some T cells from each person’s blood. Then, instead of looking for cells that specifically target melanoma, the scientists infected the cells with a virus that caused them to express a protein called MART-1 on their surfaces. This protein is known to make T cells recognize and kill melanoma tumors.

The researchers infused the modified cells back into their original owners. Over the next several months, two of the patients had dramatic regressions of their tumors and are now considered diseasefree. Although tumors didn’t regress in the remaining 15 patients, the scientists found that at least 10 percent of the cancer-fighting cells survived and continued to circulate in these patients’ bloodstreams.

Rosenberg says that he and his team aren’t sure why the anticancer responses differed among the patients. However, he says that the fact that the cancer-fighting cells persisted in all the patients is “very encouraging.”

“It’s a proof of principle that you can take normal cells, engineer them, and make them recognize and destroy cancer. Once you know it’s possible, you have the potential to improve upon it,” Rosenberg says.

He and his team are currently working on inserting genes into T cells that prompt more-aggressive anti-melanoma responses or responses to other common types of cancer.

The findings, published in an upcoming Science, could eventually make adoptive cell transfer part of the standard therapy for many types of cancer, says New York University cancer immunologist Michelle Krogsgaard.

“The problem with adoptive cell transfer is it’s a really good idea but it hasn’t been that successful,” she says. The new paper “opens up a lot of possibilities … to manipulate T cells for transfers that you couldn’t do before.”

Baltimore, MD — As unbelievable as it seems the key to stopping many cancers has been around for over 30 years. Yet it has been banned. Blocked. And kept out of your medicine cabinet by the very agency designed to protect your health–the FDA.

In 1966, the senior oncologist at a prominent New York hospital rocked the medical world when he developed a serum that “shrank cancer tumors in 45 minutes!” 90 minutes later they were gone … Headlines hit every major paper around the world. Scientists and researchers applauded. Time and again this life saving treatment worked miracles, but the FDA ignored the research and hope he brought and shut him down.

You read that right. He was not only shut down–but also forced out of the country where others benefited from his discovery. That was 38 years ago. How many other treatments have they been allowed to hide? Just as in the case of Dr. Burton’s miracle serum these too go unmentioned.

Two-Nutrient Cancer Breakthrough …

Decades ago, European research scientist Dr. Johanna Budwig, a six-time Nobel Award nominee, discovered a totally natural formula that not only protects against the development of cancer, but people all over the world who have been diagnosed with incurable cancer and sent home to die have actually benefited from her research–and now lead normal lives.

After 30 years of study, Dr. Budwig discovered that the blood of seriously ill cancer patients was deficient in certain substances and nutrients. Yet, healthy blood always contained these ingredients. It was the lack of these nutrients that allowed cancer cells to grow wild and out of control.

By simply eating a combination of two natural and delicious foods (found on page 134) not only can cancer be prevented–but in case after case it was actually healed! “Symptoms of cancer, liver dysfunction, and diabetes were completely alleviated.” Remarkably, what Dr. Budwig discovered was a totally natural way for eradicating cancer.

However, when she went to publish these results so that everyone could benefit–she was blocked by manufacturers with heavy financial stakes! For over 10 years now her methods have proved effective–yet she is denied publication–blocked by the giants who don’t want you to read her words.

What’s more, the world is full of expert minds like Dr. Budwig who have pursued cancer remedies and come up with remarkable natural formulas and diets that work for hundreds and thousands of patients. How to Fight Cancer & Win author William Fischer has studied these methods and revealed their secrets for you–so that you or someone you love may be spared the horrors of conventional cancer treatments.

As early as 1947, Virginia Livingston, M.D., isolated a cancer-causing microbe. She noted that every cancer sample analyzed (whether human or other animal) contained it.

This microbe–a bacteria that is actually in each of us from birth to death–multiplies and promotes cancer when the immune system is weakened by disease, stress, or poor nutrition. Worst of all, the microbes secrete a special hormone protector that short-circuits our body’s immune system–allowing the microbes to grow undetected for years. No wonder so many patients are riddled with cancer by the time it is detected. But there is hope even for them …

Turn to page 82 of How to Fight Cancer & Win for the delicious diet that can help stop the formation of cancer cells and shrink tumors.

They walked away from traditional cancer treatments … and were healed! Throughout the pages of How to Fight Cancer & Win you’ll meet real people who were diagnosed with cancer–suffered through harsh conventional treatments–turned their backs on so called modern medicine–only to be miraculously healed by natural means! Here is just a sampling of what others have to say about the book.

“We purchased How to Fight Cancer & Win, and immediately my husband started following the recommended diet for his just diagnosed colon cancer. He refused the surgery that our doctors advised. Since following the regime recommended in the book he has had no problems at all, cancer-wise. If not cured, we believe the cancer has to be in remission.”

–Thelma B.

“I bought How to Fight Cancer & Win and this has to be the greatest book I’ve ever read. I have had astounding results from the easy to understand knowledge found in this book. My whole life has improved drastically and I have done so much for many others. The information goes far beyond the health thinking of today.”

–Hugh M.

“I can’t find adequate words to describe my appreciation of your work in providing How to Fight Cancer & Win. You had to do an enormous amount of research to bring this vast and most important knowledge to your readers.

My doctor found two tumors on my prostate with a high P.S.A. He scheduled a time to surgically remove the prostate, but I canceled the appointment. Instead I went on the diet discussed in the book combined with another supplement. Over the months my P.S.A. has lowered until the last reading was one point two.”

More than 230,000 American men will be diagnosed with prostate cancer this year and more than 30,000 will die of the disease. (1) Prostate cancer is the leading source of new cancer cases among men in the United States and the second leading source of cancer-related deaths. (1) One of the most important risk factors for the disease is having a family history of prostate cancer, with an estimated 5-10% of cases resulting from inherited factors. (1-3) Men with a father or brother with prostate cancer have more than twice the age-adjusted risk for the disease, compared with men without such family histories.

Therefore, it is not surprising that having a family history of prostate cancer has been linked to increased worry about the disease. (2) Worry about prostate cancer has been shown to be related to emotional (eg, depressive symptoms, anxiety, intrusions, and avoidance of prostate cancer-related material), (2) behavioral (eg, prostate cancer screening), (5,6) and physical (eg, abnormal prostate-specific antigen [PSA] levels) (7) outcomes. Therefore, a better understanding of the predictors of prostate cancer-related worry may help researchers to develop interventions to ameliorate these outcomes.

In addition to being related to increased worry about prostate cancer, a family history of the disease has also been found to be related to individuals’ perceived risk of prostate cancer. (8) Although there are few studies about this, those in which researchers have examined this relationship fall into one of two categories–those focused solely on men with family histories of prostate cancer (FHP+ men) and those comparing men with and without family histories of prostate cancer (FHP+ vs. FHP- men). Results of studies in which researchers focused solely on FHP+ men have generally indicated that these men have high levels of perceived risk. (2,9) The majority of researchers who have compared specifically recruited samples of FHP+ and FHP- men have also reported a relationship between family history status and perceived risk of prostate cancer. (10,11) Nevertheless, with a sample recruited from the public area of a major medical center assessed anonymously, researchers found no relationship between family history and perceived risk for prostate cancer. (12,13) Note, however, that the size of the FHP+ group in that study was small, and therefore negative findings should be interpreted with caution.

Researchers in several studies have found that men’s perceived risk of prostate cancer is related to their worrying about prostate cancer. (2,7) For example, Cohen and colleagues (7) found a positive relationship between perceived risk of prostate cancer and level of prostate cancer-related worry. In addition, among FHP+ men, increased perceived risk of prostate cancer has been related to increased likelihood of cancer worries affecting everyday life. (2)

Although the evidence strongly suggests a positive relationship between perceived risk of–and worry about–prostate cancer, the causal direction of this relationship has yet to be established. On the one hand, researchers have suggested that the cognitive perception of one’s risk for cancer engenders worry, (14) and this directionality has been supported by statistical analyses in the context of other diseases. (12) Yet, theoretical perspectives and empirical evidence in the literature has also supported the reverse causal direction. (15) That is, researchers have suggested that increased levels of worry might lead to increases in perceived risk. For example, Lerner and colleagues (16) studied a sample of Americans following September 11, 2001, and found evidence that increased levels of anxiety shortly after September 11 predicted greater risk estimates 6 to 10 weeks later. Therefore, we designed the present study to provide a test of directionality between perceived risk of and worry about prostate cancer using structural equation modeling.

Prostate cancer-specific risk and worry do not exist in isolation. Rather, they exist in the broader context of concerns about disease in general. DiLorenzo et al. (12) recently published the first study, to our knowledge, examining the interrelationships among disease-specific and more general risk and worry. Using SEM, those authors found that in the cases of breast cancer, colon cancer, heart disease, and diabetes, both family history of a specific disease and higher perceived risk of other diseases predicted heightened disease-specific perceived risk. In turn, they found that higher disease-specific perceived risk was related to higher disease-specific worry and to less worry about other diseases, and disease-specific worry in turn was related to increased worry about other diseases. In addition, higher perceived risk of other diseases was related to heightened worry about other diseases.

DiLorenzo et al.’s (12) findings are largely congruent with previous findings in the literature. For example, their finding that perceived risk of other diseases predicted disease-specific perceived risk is consistent with a recent study by McGregor and colleagues, (17) in which the authors found that generalized expectancy for risk was related to specific expectancy for risk (ie, perceived risk of breast cancer). DiLorenzo et al.’s finding of a positive relationship between perceived risk of other diseases and disease-specific worry is similarly consistent with McGregor and colleagues’ (17) finding that generalized risk expectancies were related to breast cancer worry.

NORTHPORT, NEW YORK — LaMantia Gallery presents a one-man exhibition featuring artist Hessam Abrishami Oct. 6-7.

While exploring the work of Hessam, all visitors will have the chance of meeting Hessam. The exhibit supports The Carol M. Baldwin Breast Cancer Research Fund, Inc. Visitors who make a $50 donation to The Carol M. Baldwin Breast Cancer Research Fund, Inc. will be entered into a drawing to win a Hessam limited-edition print of “Autumn Eve,” personally embellished and donated by the artist and framed by the gallery.

A daily glass of pomegranate juice may benefit prostate cancer sufferers, found a trial at UCLA’s Jonsson Cancer Center. In the three-year study, 50 men who had already been treated with surgery and/or radiation for prostate cancer were given a glass of the juice daily. Of those whose prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels continued to rise–indicating that the cancer was progressing–the average time it took for the levels to double was increased from 15 months to 54 months, almost fourfold.

The pomegranate juice’s slowing effect on PSA rise may delay the necessity for further therapy and increase patients’ longevity.

Not all sun rays are bad, although prolonged sun bathing during the hottest times of the day is indisputably linked to skin cancer and premature skin aging. But, controlled daily exposure of 20 to 30 minutes increases the body’s vitamin D production, and can actually reduce cancer risk at 16 body sites, according to an article in a recent issue of Anticancer Research. The 16 sites include six sites of gastrointestinal cancers, three female sites (breast, ovarian, endometrial), three urogenital cancer sites, two types of lymphomas and two upper aerodigestive tract cancers.

The study compared cancer mortality rates by state for Caucasian Americans for the years from 1950 to 1969 and from 1970 to 1994. Researchers discovered that mortality rates for breast, colon, ovarian, rectal and some other cancers were 30 to 50 percent lower in areas like the south and southwestern states where UVB levels are more intense compared to the northeastern states. The study controlled for other cancer risk factors such as smoking and alcohol consumption.

What’s the take-home message for seniors? “As you age, vitamin D production decreases considerably, which is a serious health concern as vitamin D deficiency has been linked to increased cancer risk,” says Dr. Grant. “If possible, go outside for 20-30 minutes without sunscreen, depending on the amount of melanin in your skin–darker skin would require longer sun exposure. Otherwise, take 1000-2000 IU of vitamin [D.sup.3] per day. Be careful, however, not to combine it with vitamin A, which competes with vitamin D. Also, you can take higher doses for a short time if you have low vitamin D levels.”

Women are more susceptible to tobacco carcinogens than men, although their lung disease is less likely to be fatal reports a recent study in the Journal of the American Medical Association. Lung cancer is now the major cause of cancer deaths among women. The study included about 14,500 asymptomatic men and women who were past or current smokers, with no previous cancers other than some melanomas, undergoing baseline screening for cancer.

While women were about the same age as men (67 compared to 68) at diagnosis, they had smoked far less–47 pack years vs. 64 pack years. (A “pack year” is a way to measure the amount a person has smoked over a long period of time. It is calculated by multiplying the number of packs of cigarettes smoked per day by the number of years the person has smoked. For example, 1 pack year is equal to smoking 1 pack per day for 1 year, or 2 packs per day for half a year.) Controlling for age and the amount smoked, researchers concluded that women smokers have almost double the risk of lung cancer compared to men–2.1 percent vs. 1.2 percent. But more women were likely to be diagnosed at Stage I than men, and their disease was less apt to be fatal.

A noninvasive laser therapy that destroys cancer cells but leaves healthy ones unharmed has been developed by scientists at Stanford (Calif.) University.

“One of the longstanding problems in medicine is how to cure cancer without harming normal body tissue,” says Hongjie Dai, associate professor of chemistry. “Standard chemotherapy destroys cancer cells and normal cells alike. That’s why patients often lose their hair and suffer numerous other side effects. For us, the Holy Grail would be finding a way to selectively kill cancer cells and not damage healthy ones.”

For the experiment, Dai and his colleagues used a basic tool of nanotechnology–carbon nanotubes, synthetic rods that are only half the width of a DNA molecule. Thousands of nanotubes easily could fit inside a typical cell.

“An interesting property of carbon nanotubes is that they absorb near-infrared light waves, which are slightly longer than visible rays of light and pass harmlessly through our cells,” Dai explains. However, shine a beam of near-infrared light on a carbon nanotube, and the results are dramatic. Electrons in the nanotube become excited and begin releasing excess energy in the form of heat. In the experiment, researchers discovered that, if they placed a solution of carbon nanotubes under a near-infrared laser beam, it would heat up to about 158[degrees]F in two minutes. When nanotubes were placed inside cells and radiated by the laser beam, the cells quickly were destroyed. However, cells without nanotubes showed no effects when placed under near-infrared light.

“It’s actually quite simple and amazing,” Dai observes. “We’re using an intrinsic property of nanotubes to develop a weapon that kills cancer.” To assure that only diseased cells were destroyed in the experiment, the scientists had to find a way to deliver carbon nanotubes into cancer cells selectively and not into healthy ones. Dai and his co-workers achieved this by performing a bit of biochemical trickery. Unlike normal cells, the surface of a cancer cell contains numerous receptors for a vitamin known as folate. The researchers decided to coat the nanotubes with folate molecules, which only would be attracted to diseased cells with folate receptors.

Most of the folate-coated nanotubes ended up inside cancer cells, bypassing the normal cells–like Trojan horses crossing the enemy line. Once the nanotubes were planted inside, the researchers shined the near-infrared laser on the cancer cells, which soon heated up and died

Because women with the BRCA1 or 2 mutations are at high (15 to 54 percent) lifetime risk of developing ovarian cancer, they are frequently advised to have a preventive bilateral oophorectomy (removal of the fallopian tubes and ovaries) by age 35. To obtain an accurate estimate of risk reduction as a result of surgery, researchers followed 1828 women gene carriers for about 3.5 years until they were either diagnosed with ovarian, fallopian tube or peritoneal cancer, died, or had their most recent medical follow-up.

Thirty percent had both ovaries and fallopian tubes removed prior to enrollment; 27 percent had the surgery while enrolled, and 43 percent did not. The results showed that until age 75, women with the BRCA1 mutation whose ovaries remain intact have a 62 percent risk of ovarian cancer compared to 18 percent for the BRCA2 carriers. But women who underwent oophorectomy had an 80 percent reduction in their risk of reproductive cancers and a four percent risk reduction of peritoneal cancer. Carriers with a history of breast cancer had a higher risk of reproductive cancers compared to those who had no breast cancer history. Although oophorectomy is usually advised when women are in their mid-thirties, the authors said that in order to preserve fertility, they would “consider doing the procedure closer to menopause in BRCA2 carriers without increasing ovarian cancer risk, but this would not provide optimal protection against breast cancer.” In general, having an oophorectomy before menopause reduces the risk of breast cancer by about one-half. This is the first large study of its kind, and was published in a recent issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association.

The Foundation for Advancement in Cancer Research (FACR) is a non-profit organization supporting and researching effective non-toxic cancer modalities. Poly-MVA[R] is a novel formula that contains a lipoic acid palladium complex (LAPd), its main active ingredient. The formula also contains riboflavin, cyanocobalamin, formyl-methionine, and acetylcysteine. The initials MVA stand for minerals, vitamins, and amino acids. Many studies and clinical experiences indicate that the LAPd found in Poly-MVA may have a role to play in the treatment of a variety of cancers, including prostate cancer and lung cancer. Recently, we had the opportunity to discuss this formula’s role in prostate and lung health with Dr. Shari Lieberman, who, together with James W. Forsythe MD, HMD, co-authored articles on the subjects in Alternative and Complementary Therapies.

Prostate health is obviously of great concern to many men. How widespread is the incidence of prostate cancer?

Dr. Lieberman: According to The Prostate Cancer Institute, prostate cancer is the single most common form of solid tumor in humans. It’s present in more than nine million men. It afflicts one in six men in their lifetimes and is newly diagnosed every 2.6 minutes. Prostate cancer kills one man every 13 minutes. It strikes as many men (and causes almost as many deaths annually) as breast cancer does women but lacks the national awareness and research funding devoted to breast cancer.

Dr. Lieberman: Yes and no. Conventional wisdom says that prostate cancer is nearly 100% survivable if detected early. However, it is rarely detected early because the technology to do so doesn’t exist. Plus, it is generally asymptomatic. There’s actually little evidence to confirm that early prostate cancer detection will confer 100% survival. This statistic can give a false sense of security because it doesn’t include the prognosis of hormone refractory prostate cancer, which is more difficult to treat and has a poorer prognosis. In addition, there is only limited published data to suggest that early intervention of any type (androgen deprivation, radiation therapy, surgery, etc.) affects survival.

FACR: Prostate cancer is also very slow-growing, isn’t it?

Dr. Lieberman: That’s correct–another reason why the 100% survivable statistic is misleading. Patients are more likely to die of other diseases before succumbing to the prostate cancer.

FACR: What are the standard forms of treatment for prostate cancer?

Dr. Lieberman: Radical prostatectomy, cryotherapy, surgical castration, external bean radiation therapy, brachytherapy, luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone therapy, and combined androgen blockage have all been used. These treatments, however, are associated with numerous side effects, the most common being impotence. Radiation therapy also is associated with the development of secondary cancer. Consequently, many men prefer the concept of “watchful waiting” to other standard treatments.

FACR: What can be done nutritionally to support conventional prostate cancer treatments?

Dr. Lieberman: Poly-MVA is an excellent choice both for those who choose the “watchful waiting” approach and those that want nutritional support as an adjuvant to standard treatment.

FACR: Poly-MVA is said to have a particularly interesting mechanism of action. Can you describe this?

Dr. Lieberman: It actually has a two-step process for its mechanisms of action. Poly-MVA is comprised of an irreversibly bound trimer of lipoic acid, a powerful water and fat-soluble antioxidant, and the mineral palladium with a thiamine (B1) core. Consequently, it exists as a polymer rather than as a single molecule. That means Poly-MVA can accept and donate energy (electron charge) at a much greater magnitude then a single molecule like other nutrients. This enables Poly-MVA to shuttle energy to the mitochondria while, at the same time, protecting DNA and other cellular tissue from oxidative stress or free radical damage that occurs during normal cellular metabolism and, especially, during times of disease (like cancer) or during the course of treatments (like radiation and chemotherapy). Essentially, Poly-MVA converts free radicals into usable cellular energy, benefiting and nourishing normal cells.

FACR: Does this mean that Poly-MVA can provide the same energy to cancer cells?

Dr. Lieberman: No. Studies and much research have demonstrated that cancer cells are unable to accept the excess energy Poly-MVA provides. This is because malignant cells function in a hypoxic (low oxygen) environment, typically using sugar to generate the energy needed to survive. The production of oxygen radicals from the energy transfer generated in a hypoxic environment facilitates cancer cell death by activating enzymes that destroy the cells. Unlike cancer cells, healthy cells are richly oxygenated. Consequently, Poly-MVA is non-toxic to the healthy cells, which benefit from the energy boost and protective effect triggered by the Lipoic Acid Palladium complex.